Oakland: The New Gold Standard in Community Control of Police Surveillance

Oakland: The New Gold Standard in Community Control of Police Surveillance

There is a new gold standard in the movement to require transparency and community engagement before local police departments are permitted to acquire or use surveillance technology. Oakland’s Surveillance and Community Safety ordinance builds upon the momentum of several cities and counties that have enacted laws to protect their residents from the unchecked proliferation of surveillance technology with the power to invade privacy and chill free speech.

Santa Clara County in Northern California passed the first ordinance of this type in 2016, putting into public view a range of surveillance equipment already in county law enforcement possession and requiring use policies, annual impact reports, and approval at a public hearing before agencies could acquire or use surveillance equipment. Since then, cities across the country, including Seattle, WA; Berkeley, CA; and Davis, CA; have expanded on this model. In addition to reports on the potential risks to civil liberties and privacy, required reporting includes an assessment of whether the surveillance technology’s use would impact or has resulted in a disparate impact on a particular segment of their community.

Oakland’s Surveillance and Community Safety ordinance raises the floor on what should be expected as additional cities and towns look to embrace these critical protections. For example, Oakland’s ordinance more clearly applies the definition of surveillance technology to include software used for surveillance-based analysis. Also, Oakland’s ordinance sets a new bar in disclosure by expressly prohibiting city agencies from entering into non-disclosure agreements (NDA) or any surveillance-related contract that conflicts with the ordinance.

For years courts and communities have been kept in the dark about the use of surveillance technology as a result of NDA’s not only with tech vendors but also with federal agencies including the FBI. As a result of these agreements, prosecutors have dropped criminal prosecution of a suspect in order to hide the use of spy tech. And law enforcement officials hide surveillance programs through parallel construction (a practice in which an investigator hides the use of a surveillance program by engineering another plausible way to have obtained the information). The protections in Oakland’s ordinance will prevent similar acts of obfuscation from taking place in the city’s courts.

With federal agencies expanding their spying programs against immigrants and others, and concern that the federal government in doing so will commandeer the surveillance programs of state and local governments, the police surveillance transparency movement continues to gain momentum on the local and state level. Already residents and lawmakers in St. Louis, Boston and elsewhere are discussing how to build upon existing examples to codify these protections in their own cities. In California, S.B. 1186 would assure that cities and counties throughout the state share in this level of local protection and the opportunity for residents to help decide whether their local police may acquire or use surveillance technology.

EFF will continue to work with our Electronic Frontier Alliance allies like Privacy Watch STL, and the Citizens Network of Protection, to help develop and pass comprehensive legislation assuring civil liberties and essential privacy. To find an Electronic Frontier Alliance member organization in your community, or to learn how your group can join the Alliance, visit eff.org/fight.

Related Updates

The San Francisco Board of Supervisors voted today by 8-to-1 to make San Francisco the first major city in the United States to ban government use of face surveillance technology. This historic measure applies to all city departments. The Stop Secret Surveillance Ordinance also takes an important step toward...

Government use of many surveillance technologies, and especially face surveillance, can invade privacy and chill free speech. It also disproportionately harms already marginalized communities: it increases the likelihood that they will be entangled with police, ICE, and other agencies with a history of abuse, bias, and unlawful violence. San Francisco’s...

The digital rights movement showed its strength this year by projecting influence in jurisdictions across the United States. Community organizations on both coasts, as well as the Midwest and the South, took action, promoting issues from net neutrality and civilian oversight of local police surveillance to the right to repair...

Last week, the City of Cambridge, MA became at least the tenth local jurisdiction in the U.S. to adopt a crucial measure enabling civilian control of police surveillance technology at the local level. The measure requires local police to obtain civilian permission before purchasing surveillance equipment, to document...

Your landlord is prohibited from making deals that restrict you to a single video provider, and those prohibitions should apply to your broadband service as well. Yet, across the country, tenants remain locked into a single choice.

Grassroots digital rights organizing has many faces, including that of hands-on hardware hacking in an Ivy League institution. Yale Privacy Lab is a member of the Electronic Frontier Alliance, a network of community and student groups advocating for digital rights in local...

A proposed amendment to the Chicago municipal code would allow businesses to use face surveillance systems that could invade biometric and location privacy, and violate a pioneering state privacy law adopted by Illinois a decade ago. EFF joined a letter with several allied privacy organizations explaining our concerns, which...

For too long, the New York Police Department has secretly deployed cutting-edge spy tech, without notice to the public. Many of these snooping devices invade our privacy, deter our free speech, and disparately burden minority and immigrant communities. Fortunately, a proposed ordinance (“the POST Act”) would lift the cloak of...

This week, two California jurisdictions joined the growing movement to subject government surveillance technology to democratic transparency and civilian control. Each culminated a local process spearheaded by concerned residents who campaigned for years. First, on Monday, the City of Palo Alto voted 8-1 to adopt an ordinance to “Establish...

Among the many bills awaiting the signature—or veto—of Governor Jerry Brown is AB 3131, a measure that would ensure transparency about police militarization across the State of California. While we are disappointed in recent legislative amendments that weakened the original bill, we remain eager to see it signed...